3 Comments

It's interesting to think about why photos of run-down buildings and objects, or even of "urban ruins", are so visually interesting--I find them the same. I think it's partly because they're so idiosyncratic. Everything that decays does so somewhat differently. It's also that they offer interesting contrasts of color, shape, etc. that are organic and unplanned. Highly maintained physical environments, buildings, cars, etc., all tend to converge on some of the same aesthetics. It's also probably unfamiliarity and that's where the "poverty tourism" trap can kick in--that the thing you don't see often catches your eye, but for someone else, it's a thing they see every day and not with pleasure.

Expand full comment
May 6, 2022Liked by Chad Orzel

Growing up in Sacramento, I mostly know Modesto because TV stations would sometimes say they're in Sacramento-Stockton-Modesto. But I don't think I've ever been there. Nice to have some images of it!

If you're going to do color correction on photos, I *highly* recommend the books by Dan Margulis. They're about Photoshop; not sure how much can translate to GIMP, as some of the techniques make extensive use of Lab color. They're the rare inspirational computer book, in that they make you want to sit down at your computer and work with images. (Sort of the way Mastering Regular Expressions makes you want to find some text to search through.)

I used to do photo walks like that (although mostly in nature) back in grad school when I first got into photography. Now I pretty much only take photos of my kids, but I can see myself doing that again when I'm less involved in their lives and activities. But I have learned to be prompt about sorting and processing, mostly to pick which photos to share with the thousands-of-miles-away grandparents.

Expand full comment